linux-kernel - Re: [Fwd: [-mm] Add an owner to the mm

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20080414123624.0635798d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:36:24 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
Cc:	balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, serue@...ibm.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [-mm] Add an owner to the mm_struct (v9)]

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 09:04:28 -0700
"Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 7:49 AM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> wrote:
> > Balbir Singh wrote:
> >
> > > If nobody has any specific objection to this patch, can I go ahead and
> > request
> > > Andrew to include this patch?
> > >
> >
> >  ->owner in struct mm_struct is very useful for revokeat() so
> >
> >  Acked-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
> >
> 
> Reviewed-by: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
> 
> I'm still not sure when to use Acked-by versus Reviewed-by - is it
> just based on the level of scrutiny/review?
> 

Yes.  Reviewed-by: is a lot stronger that Acked-by:.  I've seen some pretty
shocking Acked-by:'s :)

Documentation/SubmittingPatches goes into a surprising amount of detail.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/